Skip to main content
Glama

Pandough.app

by app.pandough

plan_bake

Read-only

Create a bake plan with ingredient calculations. Returns exact ingredient amounts in grams, an auto-sized yeast amount, a fermentation schedule, dough warnings, and a calculator URL the user can open in Pandough with all parameters prefilled. Before calling this, gather the inputs that actually determine a good plan (skip any the user already volunteered): (1) Strongly ask which oven model they use — call search_ovens and pass ovenSlug. If it is unlisted, ask for ovenType plus ovenMaxCelsius. Oven capability materially changes the hydration band and bake feasibility; if the user declines, proceed but say the result is not oven-adapted. (2) Which flour(s) do they have? — call search_flours to resolve a flourSlug (or pass flourBlend for a 2–5 flour cut, e.g. a Pulcinella base with 30% Manitoba); this is what makes hydration and warnings flour-aware. (3) Their room temperature and fridge temperature — pass roomTempCelsius/fridgeTempCelsius; temperature is the dominant driver of yeast amount and timing. (4) How they mix/knead (by hand, stand mixer, no-knead) — plan_bake does not return technique guidance, so pair it with a troubleshoot call for method advice. (5) Do they want a preferment? — pass preferment for a biga, poolish, tiga, cold/long biga, or a natural sourdough starter. The yeast figure accounts for the preferment, and the calculator link opens with the build already set up, so recommending a biga in prose without passing this param hands the user a direct dough. Don't interrogate a user who already gave a full brief.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
localeNoUI locale for the returned calculator link (e.g. 'en', 'pl', 'it'). Defaults to 'en'.
bakeTimeNoTarget bake time as an ISO 8601 datetime (e.g. '2026-06-10T18:00:00Z'). Must be in the future.
ovenSlugNoExact oven model slug from search_ovens. Strongly preferred: the engine uses the model's real ceiling and oven class to adapt hydration and bake feasibility. Mutually exclusive with manual ovenType/ovenMaxCelsius.
ovenTypeNoOven class for an unlisted model. Pass together with ovenMaxCelsius; prefer ovenSlug when search_ovens finds the model.
servingsNoNumber of portions/pizzas (1–50, default: 4)
flourSlugNoFlour slug from search_flours (e.g. 'caputo-pizzeria'). For a single flour. Mutually exclusive with flourBlend.
flourBlendNoA weighted flour blend (2–5 flours summing to 100%), e.g. [{flourSlug:'caputo-pizzeria',percent:70},{flourSlug:'manitoba-oro',percent:30}]. Mutually exclusive with flourSlug.
prefermentNoPlan the bake around a preferment (biga, poolish, tiga, sourdough…). The yeast figure returned accounts for it, and the calculator link opens with the build already set up.
recipeSlugYesRecipe type slug. Supported: neapolitan-pizza, classica-pizza, focaccia, artisan-bread, baguette (call list_recipes for the full list). When the user names a style like 'classica', pass that style here — do NOT confuse it with a flour whose name happens to contain the word.
roomTempHoursNoRoom-temperature fermentation hours (0–168). Pass BOTH this and fridgeTempHours to lock the split; naming only a total lets the engine choose. Room legs above 14h are clamped with a warning.
ovenMaxCelsiusNoThe real maximum temperature in °C for an unlisted oven (100–600). This is what constrains hydration and bake time.
ovenMinCelsiusNoOptional minimum set temperature in °C for an unlisted oven.
fridgeTempHoursNoCold fermentation hours (0–168). Pass BOTH this and roomTempHours to lock the split.
roomTempCelsiusNoThe user's real kitchen temperature in °C (2–40). The single biggest driver of yeast amount and timing — ask the user for it.
hydrationPercentNoTarget hydration percentage (40–110)
fridgeTempCelsiusNoThe user's real fridge temperature in °C (0–12). Ask the user for it when a cold ferment is involved.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description reveals important behavioral traits: results are oven-adapted only if an oven is supplied, unlisted ovens fall back to manual type/max temp, the yeast figure accounts for preferment, then calculator link is prefilled, and room legs above 14h are clamped with a warning. This goes well beyond what annotations express.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is long, but it earns its length for a 16-parameter tool with a nested preferment object. It front-loads the outcome, then uses a numbered preparation checklist that is easy for an agent to follow. A small amount of redundancy with schema descriptions is present, but no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers what the tool returns, how to source each decision-critical parameter, what to do when data is missing, and how to route related requests to siblings. Despite having no output schema, the return values are explicitly named, so an agent has enough context to call the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Even though the schema already covers all parameters, the description adds meaning the schema cannot: ovenSlug is strongly preferred because it changes hydration band and feasibility, roomTempCelsius is 'the single biggest driver' of yeast and timing, and preferment must be passed as a parameter to avoid handing the user a direct dough. This substantially enriches the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description leads with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a bake plan with ingredient calculations' and enumerates the concrete outputs (ingredient grams, yeast amount, fermentation schedule, warnings, calculator URL). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling search/list/troubleshoot tools by describing its planning role.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives an explicit pre-call workflow: call search_ovens and search_flours, gather temperatures, ask about preferment, and pair with troubleshoot if the user wants technique guidance. It also says when not to interrogate the user ('skip any the user already volunteered'), which is concrete usage guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Pandough.app toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct domain object or action: flour lookup/detail, oven lookup, recipe style enumeration, bake planning, active bake listing, and troubleshooting. Even search_flours and get_flour_details are clearly separated into discovery vs. deep detail, so there is no real ambiguity.

Naming Consistency4/5

Most tool names follow a clear verb_noun pattern such as search_flours, get_flour_details, list_recipes, and plan_bake. The bare verb 'troubleshoot' breaks the pattern slightly, but overall the naming is predictable and readable.

Tool Count5/5

Seven tools is well-scoped for a baking planning domain and covers the core workflow from ingredient and equipment lookup to planning and troubleshooting. Each tool earns its place without unnecessary bloat or a too-thin surface.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the main bake-planning workflow well: find flour and oven, choose a recipe style, plan the bake, and get troubleshooting help. Minor gaps exist around managing active bakes beyond listing them and lack of a dedicated recipe detail endpoint, but agents can work around these.

Resources